Herb-Derived Medicines: Marijuana and Opium.

My reaction to anything people say is to read history. For medical pot, I look to China in the early to mid-19th century. When the British came a-knockin' with Indian Opium in 1792, the Chinese Emporer was all "aiite, sounds good...it's a medicine and all." By 1826, the fabric of urban Chinese society was entirely destroyed. In 1838, the Emperor appointed Lin Zexu to go to Canton and demolish the opium trade. In 1839, the British sent troops to enforce the opium trade's existence - they went to war with China over opium (known as the "Opium War" lol). The medicinal effects were entirely overlooked and a lot of suffering happened because of it.

Psychoactive drugs destroy societies

What happened to "medical opium?" By the 1860's, scientists had taken plant-based opium (poppies) and made a mass-producable drug: morphine. From morphine we have oxycodone, common codeine (which is in Tylenol/Excedrine today), and thousands of other drugs: all much safer with fewer side effects, less addictive capacity, and more targeted results than.........smoking a plant.

Marijuana is not a wonderdrug. It's a plant. The medicinal properties of it can be isolated and made into a painkiller: we dont need to be getting cancer patients stoned to get rid of their headaches. Just as opium has bred a bunch of commonly used, excellent drugs, cannibis can breed "canniboids." Dronabinol already exists (known as 'Marinol') and is, like morphine, a very crude drug. Instead of investing so many millions in the regulation of medical pot, why not have drug companies make drugs out of it? It's, you know, what they do.

After all, we live in the modern world: we dont rip up grass and light it on fire to get rid of minor aches and pains.

Share

Why I am a Republican and The Challenge for Conservative Leadership

I've been asked a handful of times why I consider myself a Republican even after the Bush administration's denial of fiscal conservatism and the party not representing the base for an extended period of time. It's quite simple, really, and I'll answer it in the format of the Michigan GOP's 2008 tear-off calendar...

I am a Republican because...in the 90's, my single mother worked 3 jobs, sometimes 4, and had the opportunity to work as much as she wanted and, thus, provide the lifestyle she wanted for herself and her children. This was made possible by Ronald Reagan (fundamentally changed America) and John Engler (unemployment was down to the lowest point ever under his leadership: 3%). These two leaders defied the establishment Left, reduced the burden of government, and freed all Americans to be as productive and wealthy as they wanted to. While Reagan's federal plans took longer to implement and longer to fade, Engler's were more direct and closer to home, making them quicker to effect change. In my life I have witnessed the success of these plans and their model of 'Opportunity + Freedom = Prosperity = Liberty;' I have also watched as the Left and their ideas infected both parties and have brought this nation, the one that accomplished so much in my childhood and prospered as no other nation in history, to its knees before the world.

The combined destruction wrought by the economic policies of Bill Clinton, Jennifer Granholm, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama is a terrible crime against the people of this nation and my state. Clinton's policies, held off to an extent by Newt Gingrich and his allies in Congress, inevitably have altered, and in the altering, tangled, the economic framework that brought our people so much liberty in the past.

Now, Michigan rots in its longest and gravest economic depression ever. Detroit, once the crown jewel of the republic, sits with 44.8% of its citizens unemployed. Of our state as a whole, more than one out of five people do not have a job. Two million, two hundred and ninety thousand of our neighbors, family members, friends, and former coworkers have been thrown into personal indignity by a government-run, government-decided, government-dominated system that does not work.

When we do find hours, we grab them and change our schedules and activities around them. It really is a fundamental change from the reality my mother raised my brother and I in through the 1990's. In the business she owns now, she's had to cut six jobs, six livelihoods, during this 'still-fragile recovery.' Our new reality makes us beholden to scarce work and, thus, less free to pursue our own interests. This government-altered reality seems to hunt down liberty and exterminate it wherever it can be found.

Instead of being enabled through opportunity and freedom provided by free markets, the elimination and over-regulation of those markets disables us and makes into pawns, bottom feeders, regardless of our level of income. While we run into trouble with our mortgages, property taxes, car payments, college bills, and utility charges, our elected 'leaders' continue to spend and spend and spend and spend, pursuing personal and political goals. They, then, seek to repeat the mistakes of the past and 'help' the economy by distracting us with a nice new paved road or train rides to Disney Land. Historical changes for the absolute worse just like this one repeatedly display the challenge for conservative leadership, a challenge met only somewhat by conservative leaders during the times of Engler and Reagan.

Conservatives have to find and nominate leaders who can build systems that are self-terminating when they've outlived their respect for liberty, but are sustainable in spite of the Left's attempts to bend them to their own devices. That's up to every one of us to ensure these systems get put in place for every one of our 513,000 elected offices. I, a lonesome blogger, dare you to prove your commitment to our principles and ensure that this kind of real change happens in your community. We can bring back that level of opportunity, freedom, prosperity, and liberty that both you and I have experienced in the past. It wont be easy, but think of the daily struggle of our troops who preserve this simple opportunity for us: we ought to do right by them and seize the day.

Share

A Time for Choosing

There's been a flurry of reports in the last few months over Afghanistan. As you may have read or heard, things are getting worse: July and August were the worst months in years of the war in terms of casualties. I wouldnt be complete if I didnt mention that some of the problem is Obama's fault. He put in place several directives to "protect civilians;" being that our enemies use these civilians as shields, these policies have resulted in some casualties on our side. With the politicking out of the way, I can get to the necessary facts.

Michael Mullen, US Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman - a big guy in the military, first called for more troops in Afghanistan (sending 21,000 during the Afghan elections) and "stalled" on liberal calls for allowing morale-damaging gays in the military. Doing his job (read: these two grievous offenses) provoked Sen. Susan Collins (D-somewhere) to request a review of the 'rules of engagement' from Mullen (meaning that she doesnt have confidence in his work). In the executive branch, the reaction has been much less exciting: Obama has stated that he will not make an 'immediate' decision on sending more troops and that he's going to be boring and "take a very deliberate process" of decision. In other words, Obama has reached a time for choosing and he doesnt know what to do - therefore he pulls over his legacy from the senate...and does nothing.

On the side seemingly pressuring him towards giving up on the war is the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Michigan's wonderful senior senator (who hits the deck if an engine backfires) Carl Levin, seems to think he and his life of Lansing, caviar and fine wine are better suited to make military judgment calls than those who eat MRE's and sleep in foxholes outside Kabul. He's supported by the liberal lifestyle groups, European socialist nations, and my more libertarian friends. Cumulatively, this support is a remnant of the arthritic "New Left" who would scrap the war effort on the advice of a few misguided, anti-pragmatic leftist faculty members who, themselves, are holed up in a fantasy world. This, however, is the world Obama comes from.

Thus his choice: he can choose to side with those who actually understand the issue, or he can play politics, satisfy his base, and secure renomination. Judging from the Guantanamo Bay Prison issue (where Obama decided to close it against common sense, the majority of the American people, and Dick Cheney), Obama will side with his Lefty base in order to gin-up sufficient inflammation to pass the energy tax, health care, and "card check." On the other hand, Dem Sen. Max Baucus' Gang of 6 (which includes John McCain...the ranking Senate Armed Services Committee Republican, who fervently disagrees with Levin's anti-war recommendation) has just released a misguided health insurance bill that will need some GOP support to have legitimacy post-passage. Upon the desk in the oval office sits one choice: it is a complex choice when viewed through a political lens yet a simple one if based in common sense.

If he decides pragmatically, Obama will apply Patraeus' model in Iraq (troop surge, essentially) with a little flexibility to compensate for Afghanistan's historical lack of a developed government. This choice will get harder and the conditions worse the longer he puts it off; regardless of what he decides, his decision will dramatically shape the future of the Obama presidency. I, for one, hope the president makes the prudent one.

Facebook politics

We all know that there is a tremendous impact on our culture from emerging social networks...yet older generations are largely absent from this sphere.

One application I use when discussing this impact is in the realm of workers' unions...my argument is, simply, that Facebook makes a continuous union entirely irrelevant. With real-time group updates, any employee can communicate en mass with all other employees; if there is a perceived abuse (lets say a contract violating staff meeting OMGrsh!!), the employee that feels strongly about it could contact all others and organize resistance against said staff meeting very quickly...and for *free.* This bypasses all need of and all use for union personnel which have classically been committed to doing said organizing for a living. Further, this decentralizes 'the union' to the point where it not only gets back to caring about the workers, it is composed entirely of small, voluntary efforts directly from professionally equal workers. The most recognizable flaw in that framework is human laziness and the will to $pay$ a bit to have someone else make your career decisions. Regardless, this is a small-scale example of the greater decentralization of American culture.

Our nation began as one focused as much as possible on decentralization of power and culture. As we "progressed," we happened upon a little guy named FDR and the trend was reversed until, as technology has progressed, we return to the upward course toward a generally decentralized culture (not government....in a democracy, political changes always follow cultural changes). We can use television as an illustration: in the 50's, you have 5 shows to watch at any given time; today you have (in my household) over 900. The difference isn't just the amount of channels, of course, its what is on: today's shows/songs/entertainment are much more tailored to specific demographics and lives where people will be most comfortable with them...this is at direct opposition to the beginning days of TV where, if you were to watch television, you had to accept culture you weren't used to...this socialized a more monolithic cultural unity.

Today, I don't have to watch MTV or other liberal stations. I can watch a Fraiser re-run every night, be entirely content and fully secure in my cultural identity. This disassociates me with Monica Conyers, Hank Williams Jr., Pierre from Montreal, Adolf from Germany, Abib from Saudi Arabia, etc. etc. With our type of selective data accessibility, we don't have to see outside our adopted norms nor do we have to even speak with people from our colleges.

My Blackberry Pearl allows me to just speak with Katelyn and a handful of pre-existing friends; if I choose, I don't ever have to 'make' friends again and it's not even necessary that I speak to my Laker peers. I can block all but an isolated group of peers from my Facebook StalkerFeed (a list of news on what your 'Friends' are doing). Effectively, we can cut ourselves off from any and all socialization beyond that which has already occurred...and we do.

As stated above, this is nothing new: geographically-based social isolation is in our American blood! The post-war rise of the 'sub-division,' small towns ('nuff said), pop-culture-famous neighborhoods in New York City, lifestyle based isolation (Saugatuck/Douglas), immigrant communites (Holland, Chinatown): these all have existed for hundreds of years and all are based around the cultural pluralism that existed at the Founding. Now, the current trend is nothing bad...you cant stop it, I cant stop it, and the government surely cant stop it.

The latter point destroys hope for a D.C. central government with anything above basic power: decentralization of culture MUST be followed by a return to the wells of democracy at the local and state levels. If you don't, you end up with the USSR's premiership in the Oval Office...someone (like Obama is now) who presses ideas based on the President's perceptions (which are vastly different than, say, mine) leading to totalitarian domination of segments of the population (i.e. what is typicalized as the the "white middle class" but is actually made up of all races, nationalities, religions, etc. It is the achievement class, a group centered around personal drive and capitalism, that is being targeted by this administration in favor of those Obama thinks inherently 'deserve' to be bettered.)

The threat is not that Obama is doing things "wrong" (we simply see them differently...the money is going away from us to those "deserving," but for Democrats, the money always comes from benevolent and kind government officials) but that he's being powerful, period. It's not right to force your norms and mores upon anybody, a decentralized system prevents this type of oppression. With Facebook generating 'artificial towns' and the economy being more and more online, we are shuffling to be with those we're comfortable with in settings of our liking. Socialism doesnt work because it overrides fundamental differences and dismantles productivity (See: France). The only sustainable answer is returning to localities/states, where government stays with people already on my Contact list, that think along the same lines as 'me,' and are right down the street/highway.

Minus posting droughts.......

I have to apologize for the lack of posts in the last few months...I realize many people have forgotten about Conservababble and moved on with their lives...hopefully not under Obama's spell.

A lot has happened since March 27th and we, as a family, have to get back to pooling our ideas together...and I, personally, have a few for discussion. These will have to wait...

In the future, I want this to be an intellectual forum. For instance, I'll put up a topic with some sources and, via the anonymous comment option, you can expand on it. Does this seem like a good idea?

Further than that, I think we can expand the scope to incorporate a common-idea outreach to conservatives in crisis. This stems from a former mill(?) worker I talked to in Plainwell that was supporting Obama due to his needing the benefits the Dems promised...though he was 'one of us' before he had lost his job. This is a situation we're seeing more and more...especially as men/breadwinners are disproportionately effected by recession. 

In order to win those votes, we have to win this argument. To do that, you have to reassure (i.e. use logic) a vast majority of unemployed conservatives against government "security"...this means giving to charity, studying scriptures for verbal use, talking to people you wouldnt generally discuss politics with, and anything else you can use to both divert attention away from Daddy Government and make necessary attention negative.

You and I can expand on this idea later but, for now, everyone has to keep up the fire alive within extended families and among neighbors, and co-workers. My next post will be logging what I've been doing since late March in the context of developing political relations skills....it has been interesting working in my antithesis (French restaurant in a gay mecca) and still spreading Conservababble at its usual pace.

Warm Spring, Melting Snow...and Flooding.

I havent got the chance to write to my local paper about the massive amount of flooding that occurs every year as the snow melts, yet I do intend to.

Anyone living in Allegan or Ottawa (the only two counties I've been in for the last...few months...) has seen standing water around this time of year. It happened last year...and the year before that...and before that...so much so that it seems that the lake levels keep dropping because all the water has gone on an adventure! ...Right into our backyards...

Preventing widespread flooding is generally the responsibility of the Drain Commissioner...ours in Allegan county is Becky Rininger and I voted for her. I was young and naive at that time (because five months ago is that long)...I didnt remember that it floods every year and never seems to stop.

This level of flooding is plainly unreasonable. I've never met Mrs. Rininger and I probably agree with her on many things, all I can see is that the ground isnt exacly comissioned to drain properly. The ebb and flow of standing water we drive past/through every day represents something much bigger...

The people charge their government with a basic protection of their lives and property. This fact is illustrated by the water problem: we the people have given the authority to non-restrictively protect us from flooding (from molding leftovers and that fun, pull-you-and-yo'-house-away flooding). When this isnt accomplished, we have to step up, talk about it, and force some action.

Personal involvement is a cornerstone of our republic and it is true at every level: federal, state, and local. If we neglect this, the future becomes rotten with powerful bureaucrats and fringe wackos that empower these bureaucrats. These phenomena begin 99% of the time at the local level...

We dont really realize it because the media reports it the opposite way, but corruption and liberal/bureaucratic hedonism begin in all of our towns and move up through the system through the political mobility of said corruptocrats. As an example: it would have been much more possible to dismantle The Obama's political career before he had the full workings of the Dem's political machine behind him, would it not?

Now I'm not calling Rininger a liberal or anything, but the situation involving her and her office only illustrates that much bigger problem of us dropping our end of the Constitution's deal. Paralleling the need get together and push some results from the Drain Commissioners of Allegan and Ottawa counties, we absolutely have to live out our values with a focus on where we have the most political impression and personal effect on the politics and people around us: at the local level.

Involvement is necessary, the consequence of failing to do so results in more 41st streets ending up under water and ruined...or someone could possibly die the next time a 52nd street collapses. 

(Did I get the latter correct? Was it 52nd in Manlius township that was washed out from under those three people in the Jeep last summer?)

Food, shelter, and healthcare for all? Over this Lib's dead body!

I was checking up on the local county newspaper, the Allegan News, as I normally do on Thursdays, when I discovered this letter to the editor...

The authors, Tom and Linda Clark, explain how a faith-based charity's setting up of a shelter in downtown Allegan (where they live) will harm Allegan's overall "prosperity." They claim that the idea of having those dirty, "near-homeless" men in a Christian shelter will damage economic transaction on the neighboring streets. ***Unlike with other hyperlinked material, I highly suggest you at least skim the brief note.***

You might be wondering about this Seeds of Grace organization? Well, it was started back in 2006 to specifically serve Allegan County's poor and downtrodden. Their "vision" is: "Food, Shelter and Healthcare for All. Our goal is simple and clear: to provide food, shelter and healthcare for residents of Allegan County who cannot afford these basic needs." The organization is entirely faith-based (501(c)(3)), involves a statement of faith for volunteers, and has a statement from former 88th Rep. Fulton Sheen displayed on the website.

So why would Tom Clark, a professed "Christian," oppose such an organization's work? I don't pretend to understand the way liberal minds work. That's right, he's a rather lib'ral Democrat that, throughout his campaign for state rep last year, spoke many times as to the need of health care insurance in the community.

Wait...I thought the liberals cared about the poor and the downtrodden in society....but having them on their streets? Eating in their diners? Walking on their sidewalks? Oh, that makes their towns "unsafe" for shoppers, of course, and will destroy some notion of "prosperity" for a town that, from what I've seen, is negatively isolated from economic cycles.

This all goes to illustrate an important point the Barry Goldwater made in The Conscience of a Conservative: liberals subordinate a man's entire being to their economic status. It's because these men will be "poor" (meaning that they've just hit a rough patch) that they need to be kept away from the well-off business owners and shoppers who, because they are "rich," are inherently good natured and law abiding. How absurd does that sound? It's bigoted and it's biased. It's hypocritical and just plain sad.

Tom Clark, like the rest of that Party, would use government to order us to carry the water and give it to the thirsty, but he and they never step down off of their own unladen horses to lift a glass and let the weak men drink. Also, Tom Clark, like the rest of that Party, cannot fathom the idea of allowing the weak man to hold the glass himself when his strength has returned; rather, they would install millions of tubes to pump the water into masses lying on their backs...

So what if a few ignorant shoppers (in this case, probably liberal like Mr. Clark) who have a "misunderstanding" about the poor decide to not troll down Locust street because a shelter is doing great things in the name of the Lord there? Goldwater stated that it is the Conservative that understands that men and women have a spiritual, emotional, and psychological side that is not subordinate whatsoever to economic condition and this situation is that principle, illustrated.

I'm not going to forget men and women who could freeze to death in favor of people who have always come and gone from a wonderful warm house, never having to know the winter wastes for what they really are...

Tom and Linda Clark conclude with a threat, "We will not do business with any organization or individual that supports or donates to Seeds of Grace to benefit this project and encourage others to make this same vow." So...have Tom and Linda Clark have now appointed themselves as leaders of an anti-American division of Allegan businessmen and women?

Anyway...I'm going to try to make some time to go down and help Seeds of Grace and I highly suggest you either do the same or make a monetary/material donation.

CAFETERIA: Liberal lunch ladies dishing out problems for Michigan

We all know about the federal CAFE standards for reduction in auto emissions, right? Well...remember these are federal, so they apply to the whole nation. This makes sense. It's easy to enforce and you the auto makers don't have to develop their own accounting firm to deal with it.

Change is a-comin'!

Obama wants to pass new standards; higher, of course, and that allow states to set their own (tighter) standards (Calipandering - Libs loving that blob of a state on the west coast - California wanted to set higher standards). Fourteen have decided to do so.

Why don't we just send a memo to GM, Ford, Chrysler, Nissan, Mazda, Honda Toyota, and all the rest of the auto industry and tell them we just cannot have them employing millions of our citizens anymore??? This is ridiculous! Every interstate auto manufacturer/supplier is going to have to put together its own accounting firm to deal with this idiot inconsistency - real good for the already hyperinflated overhead costs of the Big 3.

This can be illustrated through another, related problem: Why do gas prices get so high? Same inconsistency. Michigan has different standards than Indiana...so if there is a shortage in Michigan, prices go sky high because you cannot, as common sense would dictate, pump it up from Indiana because of bureaucratic, global-warming-scare regulations...

Perhaps I falsely hope that our legislators will adapt their standards to the Big 3 and Nissan as to make it consistent with those companies' locations outside of Michigan. We can only expect that our governor's intimate knowledge of how things don't work will serve to deny my hopes. Anyway, Dems are just proving, again, that they just fail to understand the role of government in America...

Simply put, it is government's job to create a stable, safe, and clean environment for all to exercise the vast well of opportunity that is our God-given right. Out of these three relative terms, stable is the most important for business, and having 36 states one way then have 14 others that are all radically different in their own individual ways is the antithesis of stable for interstate commerce. For this reason, I'm going to be calling these new standards the CAFETERIA list.

No particular acronym comes to mind, but the domestic auto industry is going to have the chaos of a poorly-designed cafeteria. I expect we'll be talking about this intellectual bankruptcy for a good long time and I'd like a chuckle unto myself when writing about it.

My Narrative on the Right to Life

As we all know, I am pro-life and whole life. From conception to a death surrounded by family, we ought to be left to live our lives. What many do not know is that I am different than most of this position. In this post I hope to share with you my unorthodox view of morality, science, progress, and the Right to Life. I feel that, when it comes to the idea of morality, I think many conservatives are wrong. Their intentions, means, foreseen result, and outlook are correct but not their modus operandi when it comes to thought.

I'm not ripping on my fellow members of the Conservative movement, I just would like to express an opposing method of reaching the same result. I think that traditional Christian Conservatism is wholly right, but that the yearning for values that have existed 'before' is wrong. We needn't look to the past to see what to work for; instead, look to faith.

Our faith tells us that He will protect us. God has blessed this country: I think we can all agree upon that. As we progress into the future, does our faith not tell us that 'moralism' will be the end result of all progress? I believe it does.

When you think of "progress," liberals and their religion, Liberalism, probably come to mind. They think that Progressivism (the embracing of their idea of progess) is the 'ditching' of all traditional morality: that this view of morality is parochial and dead and that 'new' moral relativism will come forth. They are dead wrong.

Liberals depend on "educated" scientists to prove their amoralistic points; this isn't happening anymore. RAW SCIENTIFIC FACT proves our case. I'm not talking about the modified, 'global warming' science they adhere to. I'm talking about the facts:

Wikipedia defines life as this:
(you really only have to read the bold parts)

1. Homeostasis: Regulation of the internal environment to maintain a constant state; for example, sweating to reduce temperature.
2. Organization: being composed of one or more cells
3. Metabolism: : Consumption of energy by converting nonliving material into cellular components (anabolism) and decomposing organic matter (catabolism). Living things require energy to maintain internal organization (homeostasis) and to produce the other phenomena associated with life.
4. Growth: Maintenance of a higher rate of synthesis than catalysis. A growing organism increases in size in all of its parts, rather than simply accumulating matter. The particular species begins to multiply and expand as the evolution continues to flourish.
5. Adaptation: The ability to change over a period of time in response to the environment. This ability is fundamental to the process of eevolution and is determined by the organism's heredity as well as the composition of metabolized substances, and external factors present.
6. Response to Stimuli: A response can take many forms, from the contraction of a unicellular organism when touched to complex reactions involving all the senses of higher animals. A response is often expressed by motion, for example, the leaves of a plant turning toward the sun or an animal chasing its prey.
7. Reproduction: The ability to produce new organisms. Reproduction can be the division of one cell to form two new cells. Usually the term is applied to the production of a new individual (either asexually, from a single parent organism, or sexually, from at least two differing parent organisms), although strictly speaking it also describes the production of new cells in the process of growth.

I'll try to keep my responses short...

1. Homeostasis: An endangered lizard in South America dips its tail into water to cool itself off...the unborn relies on his or her mother for warm...kangaroos do also...out of the womb...it's illegal to kill both animals...but not an unborn baby.
2. Organization: Well that's quite obvious...
3. Metabolism: The placenta feeds the baby just like we rely on plants and animals while we're walking and talking.
4. Growth: The 'Stages of Growth' imply that this exists.
5. Adaptation: Stuff that's internalized...like alchohal or tobacco smoke...effect the way the baby grows. Brain probelms and likely alcohalism result from the mother's alcohal comsumption while athsema or cystic fibrosis result from tobacco comsumption.
6. Response to Stimuli: A baby in the zygote state will find the best spot to position itself on the womb's wall, in the embryo state he or she tries to stay 'upright', and a fetus will protect his or her face from a twin's kicks using their hands and forearms.
7. Reproduction: An unborn child may not fulfill the basic requirements of making a new organism, but reproducing cells is basic to the growth: this cannot be denied.

The anti-life people believe in the scientific method and they openly admit it...shouldnt they really get their facts, values, and principles correct before they go pandering to the promiscuous vote...

It just all upholds the position that Liberals and Dems have absolutly no core principles...bright bold colors....our colors are...ummm...red, white, and blue while their's are faded, soggy, and sickly shades of green and pinko-red....

I'm sorry if that last part didnt make much sense...it does to me and it's late.

Barack Hussein Obama is a Racist

On his website, there is a section where Hussein Obama's handlers respond to "Smears" with "Truths." What they dont really understand is that the truths are just as bad as the smears.

The following quote is offered as a "truth:"

"Yes, I'd seen weakness in other men--Gramps and his disappointments, Lolo and his compromise. But these men had become object lessons for me, men I might love but never emulate, white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela. And if later I saw that the black men I knew--Frank or Ray or Will or Rafiq--fell short of such lofty standards; if I had learned to respect these men for the struggles they went through, recognizing them as my own--my father's voice had nevertheless remained untainted, inspiring, rebuking, granting or withholding approval. You do not work hard enough, Barry. You must help in your people's struggle. Wake up, black man!"

Alrighty then...you make your decision on it now...

Here's mine:

Martin Robison Delany, the first advocate of a "black nation." Malcolm X, 'black supremist' and founder of the 'Black Muslims'. W.E.B. DuBois, the self-described 'black socialist;' he advocated that the 'blacks' ought to overthrow the 'whites' by force. Nelson Mandela, respected by myself and the world for acting against apartheid in South Africa...though his actions were of terrorism and against the 'white ruling class;' (I'm actually quite sad that 'black separatist' Barack Obama is attempting to put himself on the same par as Mandela). It's all actually quite sad.

While McCain and the 'evil right-wing bloggers and pundits' hold men like George Washington, TJeff, Ben Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, Booker T. Washington, Martin Luther King Jr., and Ronald Reagan in high esteem; Hussein Obama holds these crazis, advocates of racial war, black supremacists, SOCIALISTS, Black Muslims, and Anti-American revolutionaries as his role models.

If you read my commentary on race, you'll find that Barack Hussein Obama's positions and causes are inherently racist and violently so when one considers that he disregards Martin Luther King Jr. and Booker T. Washington in his list of 'black heroes.'

I mourn the day the politically uneducated and misled masses elect this openly prejudiced, Anti-American hypocrite to the office fit for a bigger man.

Oboorsma

"Todd Boorsma is the Barack Obama of the Republican Party."

The above was stated by Matt Howell, the man who has written two letters to the voters of the 88th attacking Todd Boorsma over the collapse of Millbrook Tack and Trailer. I agree entirely.

The man sells himself well, like Obama. He hides his immense flaws with a salesman's smile and a Dutch last name, the previous like Obama. His website lies when it says that Oboorsma has "managed several companies" bringing them from the "bottom 10% to the top 10%." He hasn't done either...

In his last two jobs he's either crashed the entire company by increasing debt from $4 to 8million (Millbrook, bought inventory disregarding the economy) or gotten fired for, presumably, not performing adequately (Chrysler...it could be something worse...like racism or sexual harassment...I don't know). Oboorsma has based his entire campaign on his business credentials but these aren't worth anything when considering his recent past.

It makes you wonder about the candidate...I've always thought he was going to be a pawn but it sounds like he'll pander to whoever will keep him from further dismissal and disgrace (i.e. special interests for campaign $ in 2010). But this is all just speculation...

Solely due to his attempted tactics of intimidation towards me today, TODD BOORSMA SHOULD DROP OUT OF THIS RACE...NOW. His continuation is a disgrace to the GOP and its home here in Allegan County.

Katelyn ended with a letter to Oboorsma, so shall I:

Dear Mr. Boorsma,

Do you "TP" the houses of those that disagree with you? I wouldn't doubt that you do from the low value of personal maturity that we witnessed tonight...or perhaps you get your mommy to do it for you...just as you got her to embarrass herself tonight. So, Mr. Boorsma, if you have any honor left, prove it by committing political seppuku and dropping out of this race.

If you do not choose to take my advice and continue to attempt to intimidate me into silence, my rhetoric will only get more vociferous. I will not fade away back into the crowd, Mr. Boorsma: you will.

Sincerely,

Chris Wicker


------Welcome my wonderful girlfriend's wonderful writing below...she'll be contributing regularly (I hope)-----

Chivalry

I'd like to stray from the political trail and write about something that the femmies (that's the feminists) is "totally dead." Chivalry is one of those many words in the English language that the populace knows the meaning to but feels that what they piece together in their minds is too simplistic. Wikipedia...the ever-reliant research source....describes 'chivalry' as courteous behavior towards women from men. That definition is far to simplistic for the femmies.

They feel that Chivalry is a condescending tone of life practiced only by those patriarchal male overlords oppressing their wives and daughters, taking away their birth control pills and their 'right' to kill babies. Now, does the true Marxifeminist believe in God? No.

So my question to them is: if there was no Creator who has given us equal rights, is there not an inherent, tribal structure written in our DNA? This tribal structure is, then, an integral part of our society, no? So feminists are fighting human biology, correct? In reference to this we can steal a quote from Lord of War: "When you fight your biology you'll always lose."

Indeed they have: by destroying chivalry around them, the radical remnant of the feminist movement perpetuates that which they are sworn to fight against: patriarchy. Is it not patriarchal when a drunken college girl is dancing on a table while one of her many boyfriends cheers something to the effect of "Take it off you whore!" Is it not patriarchal when these same feminists cannot manage their operation's money correctly and must be bailed out by husbands? Is it not patriarchal when Granholm's husband exerts more power than she does among the elite in Lansing?

The women's liberation movement is over. The 'pay discrepancy' is due to maternal leave ("Oh I'm taking off 6months...make sure you continue to give me those quarterly raises!") and innate physical development (this will disappear with deindustrialization and further machination of the assembly processes). Opportunities and academics will stop crafting themselves to facilitate the particular advancement of girls and young women for they have proven themselves to be able to fight in Vick's pit just as well as the male dogs. The 'New Left' Feminists are now in their 50's and 60's, wrought with arthritis and AIDS, and only attempt to continue to exert their influence in the Democratic Party by creating the "Women Issue." They still think they should force their definition of success on women that wish to settle down and raise families. This revocation of freedom is not the future for America.

The future of society is a realignment from the tainting of Radical Feminazi influence. We must shift away from the ideology that directly relates personal freedom with sexual promiscuity. In doing this I believe that God and His forces of modernization command us to make free the lives of the unborn, to accept the facts that Embryonic Stem Cell research hasnt produced any cures and is already obsolete in the fact of umbilical stem cell cures, and to keep Chivalry as it has continued outside of college campuses. Morality is not, as the feminists say, the way of the past. It is the future and I'm looking foreword to it.

Now I know you have something to say about this post: go ahead and leave a comment or two! Its the blue, underlined "0 Comments" word right below this: just leave it as "Anonymous!" Thanks..CW

The Schmids

I am, of course, talking about Greg and his grandfather Allen. If you're more active than me in state politics, this last name is probably familiar. Greg is an attorney from Saginaw with a passion for petitions. He and his grandfather are currently sponsoring two initiatives I'd like to bring to your attention today.

First:
__The People's Choice Tax Repeal Amendment of 2008 is focused on removing the, for want of a more negative word, crippling tax hikes encumbering we the people. The amendment, once passed, will require popular approval for tax increases. Schmid calls it an "automatic referendum" which will force the government to reflect what families are required to do: cut expenses to make ends meet. The amendment also will standardize petition forms and limit the kinds of rules placed on the petition process.

My Take: HECK YES. That's all I have to say.

----------------

__The second amendment (no pun intended) in petition form is simply the Part-Time Legislature Amendment of 2008. To create this Part-Time body, it limits regular annual sessions so that our reps would work from the second Wednesday in March to July 1. The amendment also makes available 20 extra days to be applied by the governor. To reflect the decreased amount of "work", annual lawmaker salaries would be cut from $79,950 to $40,000, their expense accounts limited, their pensions eliminated, the Officeholders' Compensation Commission dethroned (i.e. put all salary increases up before elections), install a $400/day absence fine, and eliminate lifetime medical coverage. In a totally unrelated point (just like the petition freedom advocacy of the above), requirement that the governor submit a balanced budget on time to avoid a censure.

My Take: I dont know about a Part-Time legislature...never really have. I know they really dont deserve full time service to the state nor do they deserve $79,950 but I would want to be a full-time legislature.... It's not for the money as you're thinking, I just love the 'politick'. I believe, in order to fairly create a part-time legislature, that you cannot together limit terms, work time, salaries, medical care, and pensions. While some of them are already filthy rich, some of them do quit their jobs and leave their families in order to work for the state. We should keep in mind that 'Politicians Are People Too.'

Before I'd sign this these changes would have to be made: extend or eliminate term limits, allow lifetime medical care for basic visits and alternative care only, make pensions equal to those of the lowest bracket of military veterans for 2009 (wouldn't include future increases in the armed forces), and change expense accounts to pay for travel with alternative fuels only (incentive to make them more available and cheaper).

Otherwise, I love the requirement on the executive.

To Download Either or Both, Visit THIS Site.
*Make sure to read the procedure!*

The Economy!

Youre probably tired of all the soothsaying so I'm not going to do it.

Who remembers the Stimulus plan? Everyone...once it is brought to mind.

What was the Stimulus plan designed to do? To use government and borrowed money to rescue the economy.

What have I been saying about the Stimulus plan since its conception? That it wouldn't work.

Who was and is right? Me.

What a good day.

Government is the problem, not the solution.

Root of the economic correction is the price of gas.

For Allegan County, who drives up the price in gas? Fed Govt taxes $1.184 per gallon. Fed Govt has placed regulations on the Oil Companies drilling abilities. This is hindering production and supply, driving up the price. State govt taxes 63 cents a gallon. State govt places regulations on the content of a gallon of gas, decreasing the supply further because it differs from other states.

The libs say the oil companies make absurd profits? Its $0.081 per gallon. Whoop-de-doo. They actually do something to earn their money...the government does nothing and makes, total, twenty three times as much per gallon.

Government is the problem, not the solution.

They ought to let the market do what it does: grow.

The Tempting of Conservatism

Before beginning, I have to apologize for the break in the posting routine...it's been a hectic couple of days...
------------------------------
"Government is the problem, not the solution." Ronald Reagan.
This is my personal political principle just as it is for many of you and others around the world.

Government is the problem, not the solution

When the husband of our governor has three assistants; their six-digit salaries funded with workingman's dollars.

Government is the problem, not the solution

When an industry is collapsing and the ruling party just watches it...eating the taxpayers' popcorn and drinking the taxpayers' wine.

Government is the problem, not the solution

When people marry for taxes' sake

Government is the problem, not the solution

When they build dams and decide they hurt salmon and add a $200billion salmon transportation system involving ever-moving trucks and miles of tubing. Now the environmentalists now say to tear it all down.

Government is the problem, not the solution

When the owner of a small business collapses at home, his forehead wrinkled and sagging from stress of the murderous weight of the Single Business Tax.

Government is the problem, not the solution

When ships bottom out in Lake Michigan ports because the federal government decided to pump millions of gallons from the Great Lakes down to the desert.

Government is the problem, not the solution

When politicians create a war with good intentions but horrible conduct until the coming of the Great General

Government is the problem, not the solution

When packs of inner city men are driven by welfare into warfare.

Government is the problem, not the solution

When they spends half a billion dollars of our money on the failed Arab outreach TV station "Alhurra."

Government is the problem, not the solution

When humanity is forced to endure the silent screams of the unborn because five people, thirty years ago thought they could play God.

Government is the problem not the solution

Because governments have never done anything both efficiently and morally correct. Never.
So I ask: why should we trust them with our health care? Why should we not limit their terms and their salaries? Washington is broken. The list above continues infinately. Herbert Hoover said

Every expansion of government in business means that government, in order to protect itself from the political consequences of its errors and wrongs, is driven irresistibly, without peace, to greater and greater control of the nation's press and platform. Free speech does not live many hours after free industry and free commerce die.

This is a true conservative principle. The Tempting of Conservatism comes in the form of the ideology of two men: George W. Bush and John McCain. These men are good conservatives socially. Politically, though, they seek and have sought to redefine what it means to be a conservative.

Government is the problem, not the solution. They are not hostile to the bureaucracy's corrupting influence. They seek not to slash its creeping, strangling vines. The auto, oil, and airline industries are strangled; health care is going: what's next? The call is to resist:

I am first and foremost an Christian. Second, I am an American. Third, a Conservative. Fourth, a Republican. I will never betray my principles, I will never give up my belief in God. Government will not be the master of my thoughts, it will not be the master of my soul. I am not behind John McCain.

Concerning Race

Nearing the end of the school year, I was asked to by a first year teacher to attend a class discussion on politics. The class, Modern World History, was your typical rabble of politically indoctrinated public school attendees (the topic of the day was "Is religious involvement in government Fascist?" My response was "No, it is Fascist when what you believe becomes political.") that enjoyed another with an opinion differing from their teacher's. So, the discussion gradually came to race.
Many of the people reading will already understand my take on race. Many will have a partial take or no take at all; for all of them, I'll detail why I'm right :) . I am not a racist. Why? Because I do not recognize race itself. The fact stands that creating racial differences for whatever reason is racism, oppressive, prejudiced, and non-Christian.
The question I asked the Modern World History class was this: "Name for me the differences between what society considers a 'black man' and what society considers a 'white man.'" One sheepish student raised his hand and said something to the effect of "their previous condition of servitude" (obviously citing the Constitution). To this I responded, "find me one living former slave" and proceeded to pose the question again. A few moments' silence brought me to announce, "It's okay to say it, our politicians and bureaucrats recognize it. The difference is skin color." I continued, "And that is inherently racist, is it not?" (Some nods at this point) "Sure there are stats out there that tell us that 'blacks' commit more crimes and are more likely to be poor and drop out of high school. My answer is simple: so? Do all 'blacks' drop out and break the law? No. Do all 'whites' stay in school and within bounds of the law? No. So why not aim your programs at addressing groups as to their exploits and not their race?"
The reason is that the Democratic Party will not give up these divisions. Who's establishment has made a huge fuss about Obama's father being from Kenya? The liberal one. They've done this because they benefit from it. By making one candidate "this" and the other "this", you have all of "these" people voting for the one that you say is like them, and all of "these" people voting for the one you say is like them. It's a form of 'class' warfare. Typical tactics from those who have been infected by a socialist base. This division is seen in a short exchange I had with the teacher of this class...
"This is the kicker," I said to the class and paused for a moment, "Nigger." Immediately the teacher attempted to deter me from continuing. In response I asked, "Why is this word considered offensive?" No hands. "C'mon, why?" Still none, "It's because you've been told it's to be considered offensive. Is this offensive: you are all hermeneutics?" I pointed at one kid, "Is it?" His response was that he had no clue what the word meant. "Of course, so how can it be offensive? Would you find the word 'Nigger' offensive if the media, your teachers, and society as a whole didn't tell you it was to be? The answer's obviously no."
At this point the teacher interjected, "Regardless, it is still offensive and if you screamed it on my doorstep, I'd hide behind the nearest couch." It was perfect. The racism brought on by liberal divisiveness right there against my presentation.
I retorted, "That's the kind of racism I'm talking about. By saying that, it reveals that you think that what you consider the 'black community' is violent and destructive. Barbaric, even. Lesser than you?" Granted, this was putting words in his mouth, but hey, it's what you do in a political discussion.
Continuing where I left off, "The message I really just want to get across that race is a fabricated separation. The Bible tells us that all people on all shores are of one blood, and that is the blood of Christ." Acts 17:26 and Romans 12:5, if you're interested. "Outside the medical field, race doesn't exist. Government shouldn't involve race in anything. In our lives we shouldn't bind others in the chains of racial classification. Regardless from where our parents, grandparents, or great-grandparents came from, we are all Americans and should be seen by each other as that and only that. Any questions?"
This is all from memory about an event about a month ago. Needless to say, he didn't invite me back. Also, please leave comments on what you think of this entry. I know at least some people read it and it is time we started some discussion.
Any questions?

The Religion of Liberalism, Pt. 1: Absolute Right

We, as human beings, ask many questions and attempt to garner substantive answers through deduction. This is science. I recently found an ad in a Lefty propaganda magazine attempting to portray itself as a scientific journal. The magazine is titled "Discover" and has, over the years, gradually devolved in little more than a tabloid-like Liberal tool. I subscribe to it because 1. its main readership is in California, and 2. it gives shreds of arguments mocking the format of talk radio. The particular ad published is for the Alpha Publishing House and based around what a man, Richard W. Wetherill, wrote awhile back.

***Note, Wetherill was one of the most prominent socialist theorists in his time. The Alpha Publishing House markets his works not as socialist print rags but as real books on how to run your life.

The headline of the ad states: "Picture a society in which there is no conflict, no jealousy, no unkind words. A society in which people think, say, and dowhat is rational and honest, resulting in behavior that is trustworthy and productive." The full-page text underneath details the underlying theory, called the Law of Absolute Right, which is based on the assumption that nothing in today's society is 'right' and that it's the fault of "mankind's teachings, religions, [and] governments." They say that these institutions have created the "societal chaos" which, in turn, has led to punishments, scoldings, sickness, death, pollution, unemployment, conflict, poverty, crime, locks on doors, addictions, the "tyranny of judgment and prejudice," and the kicker: deprivation. It states that the answer is adhering to their law, rebuking all other beliefs but that of their form of 'science', and, thus, becoming one of the "survivors who brings to fruition a perfectly performing society."

It's a religion! People actually believe this. Liberals believe this. If you're saying now, "Well, Wicker, I just think that's a bit too much" just take into consideration what they want: "Change, change, change, change! Nothing going on now is good. Those in power are dishonest people that cheated to get where they are." They may not even know it themselves but modern liberalism implicitly is linked to this.
According to the ad, the original sin is obeying the status quo, following the way of the law of nature is the path to salvation, something will happen where only the faithful survive, and a "perfectly performing society."
This is why the liberal establishment is against any and all faith for it violates the rebuking of all "supernatural ideas" requirement for their salvation. Their radical base, shown for what they are in this ad, has infected the rest of what would otherwise be a good establishment with these principles. This religion is not the way of peace and harmony as they say, but of a world revolution where they kill us and win. It is a sick fantasy dreamed up by Karl Marx and extended by V. I. Lenin, defeated by Reagan and the spirit of America, and living on virally in today's society. Its followers have yet to be thrown out by the Democrat's leaders and many of them are embraced today by those such as Barack Hussein Obama (as he has a "friendly relationship"-Obama camp has said- with Bill Ayres, one of the Weatherman Underground).

It scares me so I thought I'd write a bit about it.

-----------
Note for future posts: I hope to do another Liberal Religion one and will get some data about the upcoming State Rep Election (Boorsma, Leatherman, Farnsworth) in the next few days.

The Abandonment

I say 'rebellion' because here I'll be discussing what is being left out on the general field as they unceasingly attack Obama. Many of the subjects may be reiterated behind a radio mic or on a television camera but this blog will customize the take on issues to show how they affect we the people and what we can do about them. So sit back and enjoy...

So what's happened??? The Republican Party is in shambles, loyalty is still high but the core principles have disappeared, they've nominated an uninspiring candidate not representing the base in any way, and Republicans across the nation in offices, elected by people wishing the government out of their lives, are expanding the bureaucracy. Many will blame this on the current President Bush.
During the Bush presidency we've seen everything from the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (which, following 9/11, I feel is needed) to the Medicare Prescription coverage expansion. The last time I checked, a $400billion entitlement expansion isn't the kind of conservatism Bush ran on in 2000. The whole compassionate conservatism thing was based on transferring government bureaucracy to private charity (based off the book 'Compassionate Conservatism' by Marvin Olasky). Frankly its plain frustrating when our politicians dont represent what we voted them in to do.
But I digress. I don't mean to tear down Bush too much: he's still... a good supporter of faith-based initiatives, got an iron backbone when it comes to the war, good on taxes, and good on NAFTA. I just mean to say that there are many instances in which the current administration has betrayed conservative principles. Now couple that with the current election situation and you generally have a frustrated base.
It's no secret that McCain is a lost soul, not a 'maverick', who can only inspire through fear. He's been bipartisan (which is to say, he's whored away his principles and given concessions to senate libs), he's been unifying (yes...again, concessions to libs), but these aren't the kind of traits that conservatives look for. We want an outsider who, like Bush, can stand strong with courage and create a majority. We see this in Mitt Romney: he's the kind of hostile-to-Washington candidate Reagan was.
A conservative who won the governorship of a liberal state. A conservative who was defeated by the same influence he seeks to end: the Washington culture. It is this culture that has tempted those that have betrayed our principles; we sent Bush there and they assimilated him. We sent a handful of Congresses there and they kept up the rhetoric of fiscal responsibility while allowing a spending spree on earmarks. This is why they lost in 2006: they ceased to be Republican conservatives.
So where are we now? I believe we have a decision to make. McCain is not our party leader. For the time that position is the President's. If McCain is to unexpectedly win in November, I will continue to remain loyal to Mitt. My leader will reflect my principles. I will not have a hero from a war two generations ago misrepresenting conservatism and changing the meaning of the word.